Young v. Wainwright’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The disputed charge is old in the law, although attacks have been made upon it in recent years. It was the point of dispute in United States v. Gainey, 380 U.S. 63 , 85 S.Ct. 754 , 13 L.Ed.2d 658 (1965), heard by the Supreme Court upon certio-rari to the Fifth Circuit. Gainey involved the statutory presumptions, provided in 26 U.S.C.A. § 5601 (a)(1), which may be drawn from presence at the site or place where, and the time when, the business of a distiller or rectifier was so engaged in or carried on, unless explained to the satisfaction of the jury, or court when tried without jury. The inference or presumption was held to be authorized and constitutionally permissible. The final paragraph of the majority opinion of Gainey cites McNamara v. Henkel, 226 U.S. 520, 525 , 33 S.Ct. 146, 147 , 57 L.Ed. 330 , wherein the Court approved a proceeding which did no more than ‘accord to the evidence, if unexplained, its natural probative force.’ ( 439 F.2d 426 at 428 ).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Engbrecht v. State